[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 9 (Tuesday, January 14, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 2399-2404]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-00523]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Docket No. TTB-2014-0001; Notice No. 141]
RIN 1513-AC03
Proposed Establishment of the Manton Valley Viticultural Area
AGENCY: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Treasury.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) proposes to
establish the approximately 11,178-acre ``Manton Valley'' viticultural
area in Shasta and Tehama Counties in northern California. The proposed
viticultural area does not lie within, nor does it contain, any other
established viticultural area. TTB designates viticultural areas to
allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to
allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase. TTB invites
comments on this proposed addition to its regulations.
DATES: Comments must be received by March 17, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Please send your comments on this proposed rule to one of
the following addresses (please note that TTB has a new address for
comments submitted by U.S. mail):
Internet: http://www.regulations.gov (via the online
comment form for this proposed rule as posted within Docket No. TTB-
2014-0001 at ``Regulations.gov,'' the Federal e-rulemaking portal);
U.S. Mail: Director, Regulations and Rulings Division,
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street NW., Box 12,
Washington, DC 20005; or
Hand delivery/courier in lieu of mail: Alcohol and Tobacco
Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street NW., Suite 200-E, Washington, DC
20005.
See the Public Participation section of this proposed rule for
specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments, and for
information on how to request a public hearing.
You may view copies of this proposed rule, selected supporting
materials, and any comments that TTB receives about this proposal at
http://www.regulations.gov within Docket No. TTB-2014-0001. A link to
that docket is posted on the TTB Web site at http://www.ttb.gov/wine/wine-rulemaking.shtml under Notice No. 141. You also may view copies of
this proposed rule, all related petitions, maps, or other supporting
materials, and any comments that TTB receives about this proposal by
appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center, 1310 G Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20005. Please call 202-453-2270 to make an appointment.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen A. Thornton, Regulations and
Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G
Street NW., Box 12, Washington, DC 20005; phone 202-453-1039, ext. 175.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority
Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol Administration Act (FAA Act),
27 U.S.C. 205(e), authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe
regulations for the labeling of wine, distilled spirits, and malt
beverages. The FAA Act provides that these regulations should, among
other things, prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading
statements on labels, and ensure that labels provide the consumer with
adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product. The
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the FAA Act
pursuant to section 1111(d) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002,
codified at 6 U.S.C. 531(d). The Secretary has delegated various
authorities through Treasury Department Order 120-01 (Revised), dated
January 21, 2003, to the TTB Administrator to perform the functions and
duties in the administration and enforcement of this law.
Part 4 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the
establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their
names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine
advertisements. Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) sets
forth standards for the preparation and submission of petitions for the
establishment or modification of American viticultural areas (AVAs) and
lists the approved AVAs.
Definition
Section 4.25(e)(1)(i) of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(1)(i))
defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-
growing region having distinguishing features as described in part 9 of
the regulations and a name and a delineated boundary as established in
part 9 of the regulations. These designations allow vintners and
consumers to attribute a given quality, reputation, or other
characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its
geographic origin. The establishment of AVAs allows vintners to
describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and
helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase. Establishment of
an AVA is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine
produced in that area.
Requirements
Section 4.25(e)(2) of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(2))
outlines the procedure for proposing an AVA and provides that any
interested party may petition TTB to establish a grape-growing region
as an AVA. Section 9.12 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 9.12) prescribes
standards for petitions for the establishment or modification of AVAs.
Petitions to establish an AVA must include the following:
Evidence that the area within the proposed AVA boundary is
nationally or locally known by the AVA name specified in the petition;
An explanation of the basis for defining the boundary of
the proposed AVA;
A narrative description of the features of the proposed
AVA affecting viticulture, such as climate, geology, soils, physical
features, and elevation, that make the proposed AVA distinctive and
distinguish it from adjacent areas outside the proposed AVA boundary;
A copy of the appropriate United States Geological Survey
(USGS) map(s) showing the location of the proposed AVA, with the
boundary of the proposed AVA clearly drawn thereon; and
A detailed narrative description of the proposed AVA
boundary based on USGS map markings.
Manton Valley Petition
TTB received a petition from Mark Livingston, of Cedar Crest
Vineyards, on behalf of Cedar Crest Vineyards and other vineyard and
winery owners in Manton, California, proposing the establishment of the
``Manton Valley'' AVA. The proposed AVA contains approximately 11,178
acres, with 11
[[Page 2400]]
commercial vineyards, covering approximately 200 acres, distributed
across the proposed AVA. The proposed AVA also has six bonded wineries.
According to the petition, the distinguishing features of the proposed
Manton Valley AVA include soils, topography, and climate. Unless
otherwise noted, all information and data pertaining to the proposed
AVA contained in this proposed rule come from the petition for the
proposed Manton Valley AVA and its supporting exhibits.
Name Evidence
The proposed Manton Valley AVA derives its name from the township
of Manton, which is located within the proposed AVA and appears on the
USGS maps included with the petition. Manton Road runs through the
proposed AVA, and a public primary school in the community is called
the Manton School. The Manton Fire Department serves the region within
the proposed AVA and is shown on the USGS Manton quadrangle map.
The petitioner chose to add the word ``valley'' to the proposed
name in reference to the large valley in which the proposed AVA and the
town of Manton are located. The USGS maps for the region do not
identify the valley in which the proposed AVA is located as ``Manton
Valley,'' but the petition included evidence that the region is known
by that name. The official Web site for the community of Manton states
that ``Manton Valley is nestled in the shadow of Mt. Lassen'' and
includes a page describing the vineyards and wineries of the ``Manton
Valley Wine Country.'' (See www.visitmantonca.com.) The Web site for
Bailey Creek Lodge describes its location as being ``nestled in the
quiet Manton Valley of Northern California's Shasta County.'' (See
www.baileycreeklodge.com.) Finally, an advertisement for the Bar Z
Ranch Bed and Breakfast in northern California describes the
establishment as ``a quaint bed and breakfast nestled in the rolling
hills of the Manton Valley.'' (See www.visitmantonca.com/BARZ.html.)
Boundary Evidence
The proposed Manton Valley AVA is described in the petition as a
valley located between the north and south forks of Battle Creek in
Shasta and Tehama Counties, in northern California. The east-west
oriented valley has a roughly teardrop shape, with a wide western
border and a narrower eastern border that tapers to a point.
The northern boundary of the proposed AVA follows a series of roads
that separate the lower, rolling elevations of the proposed AVA from
the higher, steeper elevations of Shingletown Ridge. The intersection
of two roads marks the easternmost point of the boundary of the
proposed AVA. This point also marks the narrow apex of both the valley
and the proposed AVA and separates the gently rolling terrain of the
proposed AVA from the steeper foothills of Mount Lassen. The southern
boundary follows a series of roads that separate the proposed AVA from
the lower, steeper elevations to the south. The western boundary
follows a series of roads that separate the proposed AVA from the lower
plateaus that dominate much of the region to the west.
Distinguishing Features
The distinguishing features of the proposed Manton Valley AVA
include soils, topography, and climate.
Soils
Most of the soil within the proposed Manton Valley AVA has volcanic
origins and is comprised of material from weathered volcanic rock,
rhyolite, or volcanic ash. The major geologic formation beneath the
proposed AVA is known as the Tuscan Formation, which was formed from
basalt, basaltic andesite, and mudflows from volcanic eruptions.
Erosion of the Tuscan Formation has contributed to the formation of
many of the soils within the proposed AVA, such as Cohasset gravelly
loams, Forward sandy loams, and Manton sandy loams. These three soils
comprise approximately 73 percent of the soils found in the proposed
Manton Valley AVA. The three soils are described as well-drained, a
characteristic that aids in preventing mildew and rot in the vines.
These soils also are generally shallow and nutrient-poor. Leaf canopies
do not become overly thick and excessively shady in nutrient-poor
soils, so the grape clusters are exposed to more sunlight and ripen
more quickly than fruit that is shaded by the excessive canopy growth
that nutrient-rich soils can promote. Vineyards planted in nutrient-
poor soils also yield fewer grapes than vineyards planted in more
fertile soil. According to the petition, the vineyards within the
proposed AVA average approximately 3 tons of grapes per acre, compared
to a typical yield of 15 tons per acre from the more fertile soils of
the Sacramento Valley, farther to the west and southwest.
The soils to the north of the proposed AVA are dominated by Windy
and McCarthy stony loams. These series are generally associated with
conifer forests and elevations higher than those found within the
proposed AVA.
The soils to the east of the proposed Manton Valley AVA are
primarily comprised of Sheld series soils, which occur on steep slopes.
The petition notes that the shallowness, erosion potential, and
excessive stoniness of the soils in this region categorize them as
Class 7 soils under the Natural Resource Conservation Service land
capability classification system, meaning they are generally unsuitable
for agricultural purposes due to one or more deficiencies that cannot
be overcome. As a result, most of the land in the region to the east of
the proposed AVA is used for grazing livestock or as wildlife habitat.
Slightly south of the proposed AVA, near Paynes Creek, the soils
are primarily comprised of Supan and Toomes series loams. These soils
are also classified as Class 7 soils, due to their rocky nature. Small
pockets of alluvial soils that do support a few small vineyards are
found along Paynes Creek and the South Fork of Battle Creek; but these
small vineyards are the exception, and most of the soils south of the
proposed AVA are used for grazing cattle.
The soils to the immediate west of the proposed AVA are almost
entirely of the Guenoc and Toomes series. These soils are very rocky,
filled with boulders, and nutrient deficient and are generally used for
grazing livestock, rather than agriculture. Farther to the west is the
Sacramento River Valley, which has its northernmost end near the towns
of Redding and Red Bluff, approximately 30-35 miles from the proposed
AVA. In the Sacramento River Valley, the soils are derived primarily
from deep quaternary sediments. These soils are nutrient-rich, allowing
vineyards to produce much larger harvests than vineyards within the
proposed AVA.
Topography
The proposed Manton Valley AVA lies entirely within a stream-cut
valley bordered by the two main forks of Battle Creek. Within the
western portion of the proposed AVA, the land is relatively flat.
Heading eastward across the proposed AVA, the land becomes
progressively hillier. The northern and southern sides of the valley
are marked by vertical canyons, where the forks of Battle Creek have
carved deeply into the land. Slope angles within the proposed AVA range
between 0 and 30 percent, according to the USDA soil survey maps
included with the petition. The slope angles are shallow enough to
reduce the risk of soil erosion and to allow for grape cultivation. The
USGS maps show
[[Page 2401]]
the average elevations within the proposed AVA range from approximately
2,000 feet to approximately 3,500 feet. According to the petition, the
elevations within the proposed AVA provide vineyards with cooler
temperatures than the lower elevations to the south and west of the
proposed AVA. Additionally, vineyards within the proposed AVA are less
subject to a risk of damaging frosts or snows than the mountains found
in the higher elevations to the north and east.
The proposed AVA also has numerous spring-fed streams, which supply
water to irrigation canals, irrigation ponds, and small lakes,
providing a reliable, year-round source of irrigation water for
vineyards. The streams also transport nutrients and minerals from
eroded soils into the irrigation canals and ponds and, eventually, into
the vineyards.
To the north of the proposed AVA is the steeper, higher terrain of
the Shingletown Ridge. Elevations in this region range from
approximately 2,400 feet to approximately 3,800 feet. According to the
USDA soil survey maps, slopes in this region range between 30 and 50
percent. The slopes are generally not suitable for viticulture due to
their steepness, and the elevations make the ridge prone to frost and
heavy snow.
To the east of the proposed AVA, the terrain becomes steeper and
higher. Slope angles in the region immediately to the east of the
proposed AVA range from 30 to 65 percent. Elevations and steepness
continue to increase farther to the east within Lassen Volcanic
National Park, approximately 25 miles from the proposed AVA. Mount
Lassen, the highest peak within the park, has an elevation of 10,457
feet. At night during the summer, cool mountain air flows down the
mountains of the park, providing overnight cooling to the lower
elevations outside the park, including the proposed Manton Valley AVA.
The region to the immediate south of the proposed AVA has lower
elevations than the proposed AVA. Along the South Fork of Battle Creek,
elevations range between 1,200 and 1,600 feet. Although the elevations
are lower than within the proposed AVA, the slope angles in this region
are steeper than the relatively gentle rolling valley of the proposed
AVA, ranging between 30 and 50 percent, as shown on the USDA soil
survey map.
To the immediate west of the proposed Manton Valley AVA are large
plateaus and elevations that are generally lower than those found
within the proposed AVA. The USGS maps show elevations ranging from
approximately 1,000 to 1,900 feet. Slope angles in this region are
similar to those within the proposed AVA.
Climate
The climate of the proposed Manton Valley AVA differs from that of
the surrounding region in terms of growing degree days, diurnal
temperature differential, and precipitation. Each of these climatic
aspects has an effect on viticulture within the proposed AVA.
The petition included information on growing degree days (GDDs) \1\
based on temperature readings for the period between April 1 and
October 31 gathered from locations both within and outside of the
proposed AVA. The data from Alger Vineyards, which is within the
proposed AVA, was collected from 2002 to 2011. The data from the Black
Butte weather station, to the north of the proposed AVA, is from the
period between 2008 and 2011. The data from the weather stations in
Manzanita Lake, to the east, from Chico, to the south, and from Redding
and Red Bluff, to the west, was all collected between 2002 and 2011.
The table below summarizes the data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In the Winkler climate classification system, annual heat
accumulation during the growing season, measured in annual growing
degree days (GDDs), defines climatic regions. One GDD accumulates
for each degree Fahrenheit that a day's mean temperature is above 50
degrees, the minimum temperature required for grapevine growth. See
Albert J. Winkler, General Viticulture (Berkeley: University of
California Press, 1974), pages 61-64.
Average Annual GDD Accumulation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Direction with respect Annual growing
Location to proposed AVA degree days Winkler classification
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alger Vineyards...................... Within.................. 3,428 Region III.
Black Butte.......................... North................... 3,400 Region III.
Manzanita Lake....................... East.................... 1,285 Region I.
Chico................................ South................... 4,200 Region V.
Redding.............................. West.................... 4,651 Region V.
Red Bluff............................ West.................... 4,712 Region V.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As shown in the table, the proposed Manton Valley AVA accumulates
significantly more GDDs than the cooler region to the east and fewer
GDDs than the very warm regions to the south and west. Although the
region to the north has a similar accumulation of GDDs, the petition
notes that temperatures to the north of the proposed AVA reach 50
degrees F earlier in the growing season and do not drop as low at
night, allowing the GDDs to accumulate at a faster rate than within the
proposed AVA. A faster rate of GDD accumulation enables growers in the
vicinity of Black Butte to harvest their grapes several weeks earlier
than growers in the proposed Manton Valley AVA.
The GDD accumulation of the proposed Manton Valley AVA places it in
the moderately warm Region III category, allowing growers to plant
warmer varieties of grapes, such as Merlot, Cabernet Sauvignon,
Zinfandel, and Viognier. As previously noted, the rate at which GDDs
accumulate also plays a role in when grapes are ripe enough to harvest.
The proposed Manton Valley AVA also experiences a greater
temperature difference between daytime highs and nighttime lows
(diurnal temperature differential) than the surrounding regions. The
petition states that this greater diurnal temperature differential is
due to the nighttime cold air drainage that flows from the high ridges
of Lassen Peak, to the east of the proposed AVA, and from the slopes of
Shingletown Ridge, to the north, into the lower elevations of the
proposed AVA, providing overnight cooling to the vineyards in the
proposed Manton Valley AVA. The table below summarizes the July
temperature differentials for the proposed AVA and the surrounding
regions. July was chosen because that month is the peak of the growing
season.
[[Page 2402]]
Average July Diurnal Temperature Differential
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Direction with
Location respect to proposed Differential
AVA (in degrees F)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alger Vineyards................... Within.............. 38.3
Black Butte....................... North............... 28
Manzanita Lake.................... East................ 30
Chico............................. South............... 32
Redding........................... West................ 32.3
Red Bluff......................... West................ 32.3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The large drop in temperature at night within the proposed AVA
delays fruit maturation and extends the growing season. The petition
states that harvest within the proposed AVA begins in very late
September or October and often continues until early December. By
contrast, most growers in the surrounding regions begin harvesting in
late August and early September. The petition also states that the
delayed maturation brought about by cooler nighttime temperatures
allows the grapes to maintain a desirable balance of sugars, pH, and
acid. Grapes within the proposed AVA are generally harvested with sugar
levels between 23 and 26 brix units, a pH between 3.3 and 3.6, and
total acid between 0.6 and 0.8 percent. By contrast, fruit from warmer
regions to the west of the proposed AVA reaches full ripeness sooner
and typically has lower acid levels, higher pH levels, and higher
amounts of sugar, factors which must be compensated for during the
winemaking process.
The amount of precipitation within the proposed Manton Valley AVA
also differentiates it from the surrounding regions. The following
table shows the average monthly and annual precipitation amounts for
the proposed AVA and adjacent regions. Data was collected from weather
stations from 2002 to 2011.
Average Annual Precipitation Amounts
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location (Direction with respect to proposed AVA)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Month Manton Paynes Creek Red Bluff Shingletown Manzanita Lake
(within) (south) (west) (north) (east)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
January......................... 5.47 5.62 4.45 7.7 8.3
February........................ 4.83 4.29 3.75 6.31 7.02
March........................... 4.33 4.33 2.9 5.66 3.88
April........................... 2.88 3.08 1.63 3.95 3.4
May............................. 2.04 1.24 1.05 1.88 2.32
June............................ 0.99 0.47 0.46 0.82 2.6
July............................ 0.12 0.15 0.07 0.24 1.5
August.......................... 0.27 0.32 0.14 0.72 0.9
September....................... 0.83 0.96 0.46 1.2 1.4
October......................... 2.21 2.33 1.37 3.38 3.76
November........................ 4.25 4.49 2.9 6.78 3.45
December........................ 5.43 5.63 4.02 7.17 6.86
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average annual inches....... 33.65 32.91 23.2 45.81 42.43
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The data in the table show that the proposed Manton Valley AVA has
higher annual precipitation levels than the region to the west and
lower levels than the regions to the north and east. Although low
precipitation amounts during the summer months ordinarily would pose a
problem for viticulture, growers within the proposed AVA are not
entirely dependent on rainfall due to the area's numerous spring-fed
creeks and streams that supply water to irrigation ponds and canals.
The petition also states that the end of the growing season in the
proposed AVA is relatively dry, with low levels of humidity during the
late summer and autumn in addition to low precipitation amounts. The
low rainfall levels, combined with low humidity, reduce the risk of
mildew and rot caused by wet growing conditions, particularly late in
the growing season. As a result, growers in the proposed AVA are able
to allow their fruit to stay on the vine longer, giving the fruit time
to mature slowly and achieve the desired sugar, acid, and pH levels.
The petition notes that although Red Bluff has significantly less
rainfall than the proposed AVA, the town's location on the Sacramento
River leads to an increase in relative humidity, so grapes cannot stay
on the vine as long as grapes within the proposed AVA without risking
mildew or rot.
Summary of Distinguishing Features
In summary, the evidence provided in the petition indicates that
the viticulturally significant geographic features of the proposed
Manton Valley AVA distinguish it from the surrounding regions in each
direction. To the north of the proposed AVA, the terrain is steeper and
elevations are higher, the diurnal temperature differential is lower,
rainfall is greater, and the soils are predominately Windy and McCarthy
stony loams. To the east, elevations are higher and slope angles are
greater, there are significantly fewer growing degree days, rainfall
amounts are higher, and soils are predominately of the Sheld series,
which are unsuitable for agriculture. To the south, elevations are
lower, slope angles are greater, growing degree day accumulations are
significantly higher, and the soils are of the Supan and Toomes series,
which also are unsuitable for agriculture. The region to the west of
the proposed AVA is characterized by lower elevations and large
plateaus, significantly warmer temperatures, less rainfall, and soils
of the Guenoc and Toomes series.
[[Page 2403]]
TTB Determination
TTB concludes that the petition to establish the 11,178-acre Manton
Valley AVA merits consideration and public comment, as invited in this
proposed rule.
Boundary Description
See the narrative boundary description of the petitioned-for AVA in
the proposed regulatory text published at the end of this proposed
rule.
Maps
The petitioner provided the required maps, and they are listed
below in the proposed regulatory text.
Impact on Current Wine Labels
Part 4 of the TTB regulations prohibits any label reference on a
wine that indicates or implies an origin other than the wine's true
place of origin. If TTB establishes this proposed AVA, its name,
``Manton Valley,'' will be recognized as a name of viticultural
significance under 27 CFR 4.39(i)(3). The text of the proposed
regulation clarifies this point. Consequently, if this proposed rule is
adopted as a final rule, wine bottlers using the name ``Manton Valley''
in a brand name, including a trademark, or in another label reference
as to the origin of the wine, would have to ensure that the product is
eligible to use the AVA name as an appellation of origin.
TTB does not believe that ``Manton,'' standing alone, should have
viticultural significance if the proposed AVA is established, due to
the widespread use of ``Manton'' as a geographical name within the
United States. A GNIS search shows the name ``Manton'' used in
reference to over 30 locations in 7 States outside the proposed AVA.
Accordingly, the proposed part 9 regulatory text set forth in this
document specifies only the full name ``Manton Valley'' as a term of
viticultural significance for purposes of part 4 of the TTB
regulations.
For a wine to be labeled with an AVA name, at least 85 percent of
the wine must be derived from grapes grown within the area represented
by that name, and the wine must meet the other conditions listed in 27
CFR 4.25(e)(3). If the wine is not eligible for labeling with an AVA
name and that name appears in the brand name, then the label is not in
compliance and the bottler must change the brand name and obtain
approval of a new label. Similarly, if the AVA name appears in another
reference on the label in a misleading manner, the bottler would have
to obtain approval of a new label.
Different rules apply if a wine has a brand name containing an AVA
name that was used as a brand name on a label approved before July 7,
1986. See 27 CFR 4.39(i)(2) for details.
Public Participation
Comments Invited
TTB invites comments from interested members of the public on
whether it should establish the proposed AVA. TTB is also interested in
receiving comments on the sufficiency and accuracy of the name,
boundary, soils, climate, and other required information submitted in
support of the petition. Please provide any available specific
information in support of your comments.
Because of the potential impact of the establishment of the
proposed Manton Valley AVA on wine labels that include the term
``Manton Valley,'' as discussed above under Impact on Current Wine
Labels, TTB is particularly interested in comments regarding whether
there will be a conflict between the proposed area name and currently
used brand names. If a commenter believes that a conflict will arise,
the comment should describe the nature of that conflict, including any
anticipated negative economic impact that approval of the proposed AVA
will have on an existing viticultural enterprise. TTB is also
interested in receiving suggestions for ways to avoid conflicts, for
example, by adopting a modified or different name for the AVA.
Submitting Comments
You may submit comments on this proposed rule by using one of the
following three methods (please note that TTB has a new address for
comments submitted by U.S. Mail):
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: You may send comments via the
online comment form posted with this proposed rule within Docket No.
TTB-2014-0001 on ``Regulations.gov,'' the Federal e-rulemaking portal,
at http://www.regulations.gov. A direct link to that docket is
available under Notice No. 141 on the TTB Web site at http://www.ttb.gov/wine/wine-rulemaking.shtml. Supplemental files may be
attached to comments submitted via Regulations.gov. For complete
instructions on how to use Regulations.gov, visit the site and click on
the ``Help'' tab.
U.S. Mail: You may send comments via postal mail to the
Director, Regulations and Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and
Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street NW., Box 12, Washington, DC 20005.
Hand Delivery/Courier: You may hand-carry your comments or
have them hand-carried to the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau,
1310 G Street NW., Suite 200-E, Washington, DC 20005.
Please submit your comments by the closing date shown above in this
proposed rule. Your comments must reference Notice No. 141 and include
your name and mailing address. Your comments also must be made in
English, be legible, and be written in language acceptable for public
disclosure. TTB does not acknowledge receipt of comments, and TTB
considers all comments as originals.
In your comment, please clearly indicate if you are commenting on
your own behalf or on behalf of an association, business, or other
entity. If you are commenting on behalf of an entity, your comment must
include the entity's name as well as your name and position title. If
you comment via Regulations.gov, please enter the entity's name in the
``Organization'' blank of the online comment form. If you comment via
postal mail or hand delivery/courier, please submit your entity's
comment on letterhead.
You may also write to the Administrator before the comment closing
date to ask for a public hearing. The Administrator reserves the right
to determine whether to hold a public hearing.
Confidentiality
All submitted comments and attachments are part of the public
record and subject to disclosure. Do not enclose any material in your
comments that you consider to be confidential or inappropriate for
public disclosure.
Public Disclosure
TTB will post, and you may view, copies of this proposed rule,
selected supporting materials, and any online or mailed comments
received about this proposal within Docket No. TTB-2014-0001 on the
Federal e-rulemaking portal, Regulations.gov, at http://www.regulations.gov. A direct link to that docket is available on the
TTB Web site at http://www.ttb.gov/wine/wine-rulemaking.shtml under
Notice No. 141. You may also reach the relevant docket through the
Regulations.gov search page at http://www.regulations.gov. For
information on how to use Regulations.gov, click on the site's ``Help''
tab.
All posted comments will display the commenter's name, organization
(if any), city, and State, and, in the case of mailed comments, all
address information, including email addresses. TTB may omit voluminous
attachments
[[Page 2404]]
or material that the Bureau considers unsuitable for posting.
You may also view copies of this proposed rule, all related
petitions, maps and other supporting materials, and any electronic or
mailed comments that TTB receives about this proposal by appointment at
the TTB Information Resource Center, 1310 G Street NW., Washington, DC
20005. You may also obtain copies at 20 cents per 8.5- x 11-inch page.
Contact TTB's information specialist at the above address or by
telephone at 202-453-2270 to schedule an appointment or to request
copies of comments or other materials.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
TTB certifies that this proposed regulation, if adopted, would not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The proposed regulation imposes no new reporting,
recordkeeping, or other administrative requirement. Any benefit derived
from the use of an AVA name would be the result of a proprietor's
efforts and consumer acceptance of wines from that area. Therefore, no
regulatory flexibility analysis is required.
Executive Order 12866
This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action as
defined by Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 1993. Therefore, no
regulatory assessment is required.
Drafting Information
Karen A. Thornton of the Regulations and Rulings Division drafted
this proposed rule.
List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9
Wine.
Proposed Regulatory Amendment
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, TTB proposes to amend
title 27, chapter I, part 9, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:
PART 9--AMERICAN VITICULTURAL AREAS
0
1. The authority citation for part 9 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 27 U.S.C. 205.
Subpart C--Approved American Viticultural Areas
0
2. Subpart C is amended by adding Sec. 9.--------to read as follows:
Sec. 9. Manton Valley.
(a) Name. The name of the viticultural area described in this
section is ``Manton Valley''. For purposes of part 4 of this chapter,
``Manton Valley'' is a term of viticultural significance.
(b) Approved maps. The three United States Geological Survey (USGS)
1:24,000 scale topographic maps used to determine the boundary of the
Manton Valley viticultural area are titled:
(1) Manton, CA, 1995;
(2) Shingletown, CA, 1985 (provisional); and
(3) Grays Peak, CA, 1995.
(c) Boundary. The Manton Valley viticultural area is located in
Shasta and Tehama Counties in northern California. The boundary of the
Manton Valley viticultural area is as described below:
(1) The beginning point is on the Manton map, in the community of
Manton, at the intersection of three unnamed light-duty roads known
locally as Manton Road, Forward Road, and Rock Creek Road, section 21,
T30N/R1E. From the beginning point, proceed northerly, then
northeasterly on Rock Creek Road approximately 0.8 mile to the road's
intersection with an unnamed light-duty road known locally as Wilson
Hill Road, section 21, T30N/R1E; then
(2) Proceed westerly, then northerly on Wilson Hill Road, crossing
onto the Shingletown map, then continue westerly, then northerly, then
northeasterly on the turning Wilson Hill Road, approximately 4 miles in
total distance, to the road's intersection with the marked power line
in section 8, T30N/R1E; then
(3) Proceed east-southeasterly along the marked power line,
crossing onto the Manton map, approximately 1.1 miles to the power
line's intersection with the Volta Powerhouse, section 16, T30N/R1E;
then
(4) From the Volta Powerhouse, proceed south-southeasterly
(downstream) along an aqueduct and penstock, approximately 0.7 mile in
total distance, to the penstock's intersection with the North Fork of
Battle Creek, section 16, T30N/R1E; then
(5) Proceed north-northeasterly (upstream) along the North Fork of
Battle Creek approximately 0.3 mile to the confluence of Bailey Creek,
section 15, T30N/R1E; then
(6) Proceed east-northeasterly (upstream) along Bailey Creek
approximately 2 miles to the creek's intersection with an unnamed
light-duty road known locally as Manton Ponderosa Way, section 11;
T30N/R1E; then
(7) Proceed southeasterly along Manton Ponderosa Way approximately
1.8 miles to the road's intersection with Rock Creek Road, and then
proceed westerly on Rock Creek Road approximately 0.05 mile to the
road's intersection with an unnamed light-duty road known locally as
Forwards Mill Road, section 19, T30N/R2E; then
(8) Proceed easterly along Forwards Mill Road approximately 4.5
miles, crossing onto the Grays Peak map, to the road's intersection
with an unnamed light-duty road known locally as Forward Road, section
26, T30N/R2E; then
(9) Proceed generally westerly along Forward Road approximately 4.8
miles, crossing onto the Manton map, to the road's intersection with an
unnamed light-duty road known locally as Ponderosa Way, section 31,
T30N/R2E; then
(10) Proceed southerly along Ponderosa Way approximately 1.7 miles
to the road's intersection with an unimproved road (Pacific Gas and
Electric service road, approximately 0.25 mile west-southwest of Bluff
Springs), section 1, T29N/R1E; then
(11) Proceed westerly along the unimproved road approximately 2.2
miles to the road's intersection with the South Battle Creek Canal,
section 3, T29N/R1E; then
(12) Proceed generally northwesterly (downstream) along the
meandering South Battle Creek Canal approximately 1.3 miles to the
canal's intersection with an unimproved road known locally as South
Powerhouse Road, section 4, T29N/R1E; then
(13) Proceed northerly along South Powerhouse Road approximately 2
miles to the road's intersection with an unnamed light-duty road known
locally as Manton Road, section 21, T30N/R1E; then
(14) Proceed easterly along Manton Road approximately 0.1 mile,
returning to the beginning point.
Signed: December 20, 2013.
John J. Manfreda,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2014-00523 Filed 1-13-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-31-P?>